ostheer medium tanks

[Aouch]

- Pz3 earlier than T34. ✔
 - Short 50, not 37. ✔
 - Native Pz3 sucks against T34/76. ✔ or better say, not really suck, but be rather inefficient
 - Upgrade 50 long, short 75. EXPENSIVE Tungsten. ✔
 - Upgrade 50 long LOSES out against StuG3 as AT. ✔ of course
 - Pz3 50 LONG were sent to be converted to StuG3. ?
 - StuG3 ARE conversions AND built from scratch as such. See my suggestion
 - StuG3 is most numerous tank in German army WW2. ✔
 - StuG3 killed 20,000 T34s. (Tank killer). ✔
 - T34 more numerous than StuG3. ✔
 - StuG3 more numerous than Pz3. ✔
  - You're not going to make Pz3 more numerous than T34. ? If someone feels like building 4 Pz3, why not? I mean, if I play soviet, I mustn't build T-34 but instead IS-2, altough the first one was by far more common.

[Blackbishop]

@Aouch
I like your idea about the "zombie" stug 3 , but i don't know if devs have considered to add "recovery vehicle" ability...

- Pz3 50 LONG were sent to be converted to StuG3. ?

He said that all the pIII that you choose to upgrade as AT, would be given the chance to be converted to StugIII.

I think Pz.III shouldn't match later tiers tanks.

[Aouch]

Of course, for the sake of balance you can make a pz3 beats advanced tanks, but Germany has the Stug 3 to offer, and no faction has used it yet. IMO if japan was the faction designed, of course you'll make the Chi-ha the MBT and strong as a sherman due the lack of tanks, but the ostheer doesn't need this.

The PzKpfW. III Ausf. J (correct me, but that's the one from the teasers) was as good as the Sherman. IRL. Therefore your Japan-example makes sence if PzIII would be as good as T-34/85 (what it wasn't) or Pershing. But if it could kill a early T-34, why not show this ingame?
StuG III should be for heavier tanks or to to destroy Shermans etc. without the high possibility that it kills your Panzer (assuming you're sending a PzIII 1on1 vs Sherman)
Post Merge: September 10, 2010, 01:08:26 AM

@Aouch
I like your idea about the "zombie" stug 3 , but i don't know if devs have considered to add "recovery vehicle" ability...

Thanks. 
You actually liked one of my ideas. 
The Bergepanzer should only be able to recover PzIII's and rebuild them. That should be the only possible vehicle it's able to recover. Therefore it won't really take away from PE's Bergetiger, since it has no use for other factions or even other vehicles.
However, it's of course still be able to repair other vehicles. To compensate for that, make normal Pios have a slow repair-rate, so you'd be "forced" to build it.

[Loupblanc]

- If Pz3J is equiv to Sherman 75, it shouldn't come earlier. Duh
- Tungsten to deal with S76/T85. Well, skirts don't help against tanks, but the added frontal armor upgrade does.
I wanted 50ammo cost to make it on par with S75, but
you want onpar with S76. I say 75ammo per shot?
- Tunsten is expensive, individual, pay each time use it :
 Ooh we agree!
- Pz3H/42 earlier. Oh yea, In agreement. I found better
 equiv. Stuart
 (Earlier than Cromwell, yet a Greyhound/Puma killer).
 : Yup, is clear. Only thing we disagree on is slight strenght-against S75/s76//T76/T85 strenght. I'd bring it down a tiny
notch. A detail.

- Yea, Operation Barbarossa, early Pz3 can be a game killer due to no AT on other side. Slow tank in enemy territory
and needing to function in groups to remove this curse is
a nerf that can be the con to give the pro of early Pz3.
Glad we agree on this Here is where we disagree. You
want a buff, where I want a curse, and a curse removal.
Not a buff.

- StuG3 is better than Pz3 against Tanks.
 Not against infantry. Ambush, etc, is actually a nerf-to-
 give-a-buff. Makes the tank dangerous without making it 'roaming tank army blob category'. It's more defensive.
: Infantry-use-assault gun-as-cover. I like it.
 Use British officer follow tag-on, or PE munition truck
 follow tag-on mechanics. Gives quasi immunity to incoming
 MG fire, but functions as hold fire or 1/2 firing rate. (More
 if they're on the move)(Moving already gives a debuff).
 Con to give a pro.

 I think Pz3 should be able to do this, as well. Not jsut StuG3.
 German doctrine is protect infantry with tanks.Where Soviets
 protected Tanks with infantry.

 - Of course you can have Pz3 and StuG3 at same time.
 They don't do same job.
 - Ok, we agree Pz3 (native not upped) should be buildable   
 BEFORE StuG3. Good.
 - Yup. StuG3 should be buildable.
 - Nope. StuG3 is LESS expensive than Pz3. Give it big cons, too. 0+1 mg instead of 2+1 mg (Like Stug4/Pz4). I think of
StuG3 as more of a Marder3. Serious flaws, cheap, but deadly
against tanks. Numerous, too. Not as good as a Marder,
because it has armor, but give it lockdown and Camouflage,
and you've got an M10 in Sherman armor with less mobility.
 : I'll agree with same cost, if the necessary muni-per-shot makes Pz3 ultimately the more expensive choice. Not to
mention the J/N upgrade from native H.

 BergerPanzer3 : Nice. I like how it'd rebuilds destroyed Pz3 into StuG3's Slight detail, PE has BergerTiger because 1)
It's their default crush AT traps vehicle. And because PE
doesn't have medic bunkers, so they got vehicle 'medic'
bunkers (for vehicles, not infantry). Can you really have both ? I'm totally for anything that encourages switching all or
MOST Pz3's into StuG3's though

 Normally, I'd agree with the Pz3 to StuG3 conversion next to  Berger3, but PE Pz4AI, Sherman75, Greyhound, etc, can all
upgrade without help away from home (But they got to be
within territory). Heck, I'd make it so can only upgrade next
to HQ if it was left to me (Blitzkrieg mod is like this). But
got to stay within context, here. Of course, I like. But I'd
have to say Berger3 isn't necessary for upgrade. Salvage,
though, is nice. (Russians should be able to do this too, but,
bleh)

 @ Black :
 Yea Pz3H - Pz3J/N - StuG3
 as the Grehound - Sherman 75 - Sherman 76 progress
 
 @aouch:
 Native Pz3 sucks against T34/76. ✔ or better say, not really suck, but be rather inefficient (Like Stuart against a Pz4)
We're talking Pz3H 50 short, here.
: StuG3
  -  Preexisting Pz3's should be convertible to StuG3 like Puma20 to Puma50.
Not like Sherman 75 to Sherman 76. So all Pz3 won't go
poof
  - StuG3 is native, non-doctrine, buildable tank that old Pz3 CAN be made into.
: Pz3 should not be more numerous than T34. / re: Why not? If soviet, go IS2 skip T34/76. Fine. My bad, but making lots
of T34s should be easier than making lots of Pz3.
 I didn't mean that you are incapable of making additional Pz3s unless opponent makes
 T34s (Fluid cap limit), but that T34s should be cheaper and easier to blob than Pz3s, not the other way around.
 : While we're on the topic, I think Pz3s AND StuG3s should have 8 pop. Not 6, not 4.

 @ Blackbishop :
 Eh. I meant all and any Pz3 would be given a chance to be converted to StuG3. H to stug3. And J to Stug3. And N to StuG3. Aye. I don't think Pz3 should match later tiers tanks by default, even when upgraded. StuG3 should be able to match later tanks but with limitations (Little AI capability,
and perhaps needing to be locked down)
 
 @ Aouch :
 Pz3J is as good as Sherman75. Not 76. Needs tungsten to deal with 76/T34-85. But there's a small detail, here. Both those tanks had decent anti infantry capability. The 50mm long vs 76mm/85mm should be completely neutered against
 infantry. Give it AT gun vs infantry stats. You're only talking anti tank here. You got to look at the broader picture.
 
 You're talking Pz3 eats greyhound, Pz3J eats Sherman76, StuG3 eats Pershing. *AND* is more numerous than their counterparts (Shermans/T34s).

 I'm talking P3 gets earlier advantage, but doesn't
compete later on, unless you use expensive ammo-per-shot tungsten. P3 that shouldn't out-spam T34/Sherman/M10. I'm talking about StuG3 that are average (Think Stug4)(But more
expensive) and that have to be used more defensively to
rape decisively (Camouflage/first strike/lockdown) But
without needing tungsten shots. Making it more similar to
a Marder, but with armor.

 - On the topic of Berger3. 2x speed repairs? Same as PE Berger
 Pro : Cheaper than PE Berger.
 Con : Can only salvage P3's into StuG3
 Con : Not a heavy crusher.
 Con : More fragile.

 I like it. I like anything that doesn't say buff, buff, buff.
 Plus, it's an argument for not making Pz3 'cheap' It'll cost
 about the same thing as a Sherman, just you can buy one earlier.
 And it won't be as good down the line. (Although still a MBT).

 Define 'slow' repair-rate? I'd prefer to say 'normal repair-rate'.

[TheReaper]

Hmm, now, I didn't understand exactly what you meant...
 Automatic upgrade once Tech up?
 
 As in (For example) If pop early 37mm (an example) Pz3
 from T2, just by making T4 building, it'll become a Pz3J ?
 
 Care to explain some?? I don't think I understand.

 Of course, it'd be nice to make all unique and different.
 I'm for that, too But they all need a few things in
 common. Like tech progression. Like no Heavy Tanks
 while other is still bringing out first engineers/pioneers.

In WE there is a reasearch to tech up Tiers in the HQ What I had in mind is this: staying in the wehrmacht style, in tier 2 you can build the Pz3 (with a building). If you tech to Tier3 the Pz3 will be upgrade with a bigger gun and/or armoured skirts or it would be researchable, like the the Panther Battlegroup in PE, so the 50 (75?) mm gun goes globaly to every pz3 tank on the field.

Wit Pz2 Lusch I can only imagine to early infantry support and firepower like the Puma, the first tank (like the Stuart) can eat it breakfast.

In the eastern front there was Rommel's Ghost Division, they got light tanks only, with elite crew, that would be some good start, looking what kind of use there was the Pz3 in the EF.

[Loupblanc]

 - We've agreed the 37mm Pz3 was in wrong period.
 So short 50mm Pz3 (H) ought to be default by 1942 (circa).
 The long 50mm AT (J) Pz3 and the short 75mm AI models
 are mutually exclusive, so we can't do a global upgrade.

  Also: 1) Pz3 comes out early. If you give it an easy
 global upgrade that makes it competitive later on, and allows
 to skip StuG3, that's exactly what people will do. Think USA
 rifleman spam, then they suddenly all get BAR rifles...
 2) Germany's economy wasn't doing well with all the
 bombardements. Not all Pz3H-Pz3L/N conversions were
 done all at the same time. Plus how do you justify
 recalling 100% of your MBT while in the middle of the
 war?

 No. Pz3 must have access to upgrades, yes, but
 ultimately going StuG3 has to be the best decision.
 (Way more StuG3 were made than there were Pz3)
 (Most Pz3 were converted to StuG3)(Not all, but most)

 I do like one of the things he's mentionned, though.
 PE-style cumulative upgrades for the Pz3 through the
 Ostheer buildings, with the ultimate being the StuG3
 'upgrade' at which point it becomes buildable from
 scratch as well as a conversion. If we use salveage,
 then that can be thrown in too.
 
 PE is about the continuous evolution of the PanzerGRen.
 Ostheer can be about the evolution of the Pz3 as the MBT.
 So it starts early, in a limited state (Like the PanzerGren)
 (Not THAT early) with severely slowed speed to prevent
 insta-win, fixed when they group with other tanks
 (H, J, N, StuG) it all works. And despite what Aouch says,
 The Pz3J/N isn't the final form of the Pz3. The StuG3 is.
 
 - A Zeal-like ability which in groups, removes it's 1/2
 speed while in enemy territory (alone). It REMOVES
 a debuff, it doesn't provide a buff.
 - The covers infantry can be one of those abilities.
 - Salvage can be one of those abilities. (to StuG3)
 - StuG3 camouflage/improved sights/AT (It's a Pz3)
 - Improvements which make StuG3 cheaper to make.
 - Tungsten shots (Expensive per use)

 Which I suggest to be quasi identical to the StuG4,
 except it has hetzer/marder3 abilities tagged on,
 which are necessary and encourage a defensive/tricky
 useage to make it deadly (like Pak38), so it's not a tank
 to use to do breakthroughs and rapeage later on.
 (You got other tanks for that - panthers? Tigers?)

 ***
 As for the Pz2 lusch. We've agreed it would take on the
 puma role. Except that Puma has a 50mm upgrade which
 doesn't make it completely useless later on. Pz2 won't
 have access to this upgrade. So, what will have it?
 
 It's not a frontline tank. First Stuart rapes it.
 So find it another use. Recon? Zone disruption?
 I was suggesting giving it a role like the Funkenwagen.
 Ressource disruption/recon. But with some armor, and
 a 20mm gun/Mg.

[Blackbishop]

I think would be good idea, when you reach, lets say tier 3, add something like "raid" ability to Pz.II, IMO the funkwagen role should belong just to that unit.

[Loupblanc]

 'Raid' ability would encourage to spam Pz2. Pz2 shouldn't
 be a 'combat' unit. Recon/harassment, perhaps. I like the
 Funkwagen disrupt ressource/large radar capability. It's
 very powerful when used properly.

 If not, might as well give the Pz2 a 50mm AT gun
 upgrade and call it a puma

[Blackbishop]

IMO Luchs should have the same armor & health than PE armored car, if you spam Pz.IIs you'll be lacking on resources to keep your line or it's GG because you already destroyed everything he/she can throw you.

[Ryousan]

Im not quite convinced of transforming PzIII into Stug III. Ii see making them as different vechicles makes more sense to me. FOr example: make the Pz III available in T2 and the StuG III available in T3.

Use the same system that The Panzer Elite uses when making upgrades: Stugs and Pz"s have a "Group Zeal" like bonus and for example if you make a research that allows you PzIII to fire AP rounds so can the the StugIII.

The difference between the two is that I see The Stug more as a tank destroyer than a breaktrough tank and the PzIII is a multi-role tank, that is why is a MBT.

Just my thoughts 

[Aouch]

So much text...   

I think now everybody is happy.
We have Pz II "Luchs" early, later, sometime between Stuart and Sherman, the Pz III with short 5cm.
Later, after individual upgrade either Pz III with long 5cm or short 7.5cm , should be on the battlefield around the same time as Sherman 75.
Finally StuG III, which can be gained by 3 different ways: Builded, Upgraded Pz III (any gun) or salvaged Pz III (any gun) via Bergepanzer III.

PzII: AC-armor, slightly nerfed Puma 2cm KwK. Recon.
PzIII 5cm L/42: > light tanks, < "real" medium tanks. light AT, medium AI. MTB. Brit-style slow movement in enemy territory, ~ 3 tanks to have normal speed,  > 4 tanks: Slightly buffed.
PzIII 5cm L/60: = Sherman 75. medium AT, light AI. MTB. Brit-style slow movement in enemy territory, ~ 3 tanks to have normal speed,  > 4 tanks: Slightly buffed. Expensive Tungsten-mun to help against Sherman 76, T-34.
PzIII 7.5cm L/24: < PE PzIV. heavy AI. Brit-style slow movement in enemy territory, ~ 3 tanks to have normal speed,  > 4 tanks: Slightly buffed.
StuG III: heavy AT, light AI. Assault-gun/Tankdestroyer. Ambush-ability, gives cover to following infantry.


Points I want to discuss about:
StuG III has ambush and infantry-cover (we'll call it this way, OK?). Pz III is nerfed in the beginning, thus no tank-rush. However, it gains normal values by using it in groups of tanks.
How about it additionally achieves a very lightly "buff" by even more tanks (4 tanks, no gigantic battlegroups  ).
I think that's just fair, since it wouldn't be a "hey, now one single Panzer can kill IS-2"-ability but just something to show its usefulness in groups.
But it shouldn't get the infantry-cover. So a player has to decide between Panzer-warfare (very expensive in late-game!) or Combined-warfare.

What do you think?



Post Merge: September 10, 2010, 03:09:37 PM@ Ryousan: I think we agreed in a similiar system, didn't we, Loup?

Basicly you can first build PzII. Later, you can additionally build PzIII. After that, you will be able to additionally build StuGIII. However, additionally you'll have the possibility to salvage PzIII-wrecks and get a StuG out of it. Or "upgrade" an existing PzIII to a StuG.

[Loupblanc]

 @ Ryousan :
 There is no purpose for a Pz4 to StuG4 conversion,
 because there is nothing that the StuG4 offers which
 the Pz4 doesn't already do.

 The Pz3 to StuG3 conversion makes sense because :
 - 50mm to 75mm LONG BARREL
 - Better frontal armor
  - There were 3x more StuG3 than Pz3 and they're
 built on a Pz3 hull...

 What you are suggesting, Ryousan, is akin to getting
 rid of the Sherman tank, and making Greyhound tanks
 strong enough to kill T34/85s.

  It's historical.
 Either get rid of the Pz3 and StuG3 altogether,
 And put in StuG4, Pz4 and Panthers... (And Pumas and
 Tigers and...)... but we want something different, yes?

 Early Pz3 that culminates to StuG3 is the way.
 What you guys propose is early Pz3 that sticks
 around to 1945 and kicks IS2 butt.

 Don't you see anything wrong with that?

 Small note :
 Pz3L60 gains some AT, but loses AI (AT gun vs inf
 capability)(Miserable)
 Pz3L24(75) gains considerable AI (Sherman 75 like)
 but miserable AT. BUT IT CAN USE Tungsten rounds.
 (Historical). Perhaps costlier, though, for them.

Post Merge: September 11, 2010, 06:52:11 AM
 As for the Pz2, if you don't intend to make it different
 from the Puma in some way...
 
 ... Why not put Puma instead?

[Aouch]

I don't know why you, Loup, criticize Ryousan's thought.
After all, I thought that's what we want?

T3 Pz3 which is able to upgrade to 5cm L/60 to be an effective MTB to fights against Sherman 75 and has sideskirts (in CoH, sideskirts improve the whole armor, not only help against anti-tank-rifles!) and tungsten-ammunition to fight against Sherman 76 and T-34.
T4 StuG3 as tankdestroyer and infantry-support-gun.

Of course, Pz3 is able to upgrade to StuG3.
But Pz3 can be still present when IS-2 is on the field. That's the whole point about a Pz3 as MTB, since StuG3 can't be a MTB. I've told you countless times, that Pz3 L/60 won't go 1on1 against a T-34/85 nore IS-2. But if an enemy don't use them, Pz3 are effective as a group.
If someone use them, you'll have to get StuG3 or you are likely to lose. 
Post Merge: September 11, 2010, 04:11:26 PMAfter thinking a while about it, I came to some conclusions:
First of all, we should stop thinking in the scheme: Allies act, OH reacts. An OH-player can also force his play-style on the enemy. 
Second, I now agree with Loup, that Stug3 should be a little bit cheaper than Pz3. (MP, not fuel, which should be around the same value.) Not only for realism-purpose but also for the sake of gameplay.
I'll explain it:

As OH-player, you have two possibilities how you do your tank-strategy.
First one is that you focus on a defensively Stug-tactic. Because Stug is cheaper than Pz3 but comes later, it would be dumb to produce a great amount of Pz3 and then upgrade them to L/60 and later to Stug3, which would cost too much resources. Therefore you rather build a few Pz3 L/42 to have at least some tanks. However, few tanks -> no early attack (remember slow movement in ET). Later, you build Stug3 and upgrade the existing Pz3. Because they cost less MP, you've enough left to recruit infantry to support you Stugs and allow to start a big attack. Focused on late victory.
Second strategy is to bump out a lot Pz3 L/42 to allow early charge on ET. Then upgrade to L/60 to give them a chance to fight against enemy early medium tanks. You have to focus on a mid-game victory, because fighting with Pz3 against enemy tanks in a later stage of the game will most likely cost you a lot of ammo (-> tungsten). Of course, you can still upgrade to Stug3, if you can't break through the enemy's frontline, but this will perhaps eat up the very last munition-resources you've got.

What do you think about this, Loup? 

[Loupblanc]

 - Why Ryousan's : Because he was against giving main
 spot to the StuG3. What he was saying, essentially, is
 that StuG3 shouldn't be important. Or convertable from
 Pz3. That's what happenned historically. In huge numbers.
 
  It's like saying he doesn't want USA to have Sherman,
 but instead wants to buff Greyhounds to fight Panthers.

 - I want Pz3 as early MBT, but inefficient to use
 when T34s/Shermans hit the field. They're obsolete.
 (Well the L42 certainly is) and tungsten rounds is not
 a viable long term strategy (We agree on this)
 Let's use comparables :
 
 Stuart - Sherman75 - Sherman 76
 Pz3L42- Pz3L60/L24 - Tungsten or StuG3

 But it comes at a cost :
 Pz3 don't only fight Tanks, they fight AT guns and infantry.
 The Pz3L60 upgrade robs them of anti - infantry cannon
 capability (Not as much as StuG upgrade, though)
 The Pz3L24 upgrade robs them of anti - tank capability
 (But they still have tunsten access, although it ought
 to be more expensive for them to use it)
 The StuG, well, the StuG should have every flaw that
 the StuG4 has (0+1 MG)(Via vet)(Not 2+1 like Pz4)

 The T34/85 is pure improvement over the T34/76.
 The L60 and L24 come at a deeper cost (Because it's
 not as much improvement as overspecialisation). See?
 T34/Sherman are all-purpose.
 As soon as it upgrades Pz3L42 loses all-purpose role
 just to be able to keep up - against infantry or tanks.

 - Thank you for agreeing that Stug3 ought to be a Pz3
 conversion / By cheaper, I meant that buying StuG3
 ought to be cheaper to make than a Pz3, especially
 once you factor in L42 to L60(or 24) to stuG3 (That's 2
 upgrades). Make a StuG3 from scratch and it's bound
 to be cheaper To balance out effectiveness, I was
 thinking perhaps making it same cost?
 - Detail : AT guns are cheap. Marder3 is cheap.
 But very effective. The StuG3 I propose is basically a
 Marder but with armor. And needing to be locked down
 and have first strike to get Marder-like punch. It's not
 a wunder-tank. Give it enough cons to justify this.
 
 ** Ok, essentially, what you are saying, is someone
 doesn't need to upgrade to Sherman 76, or even T34/85
 or even IS2. If he can win with just Puma/Greyhound/
 T70/Stuart, then let it be. Oh, yea, completely agree.
 
 I said StuG3 is the natural ultimate form of the Pz3.
 I didn't say you HAVE to upgrade to StuG3
 (You have to go StuG3 to keep up with T34/85's)
 (Without tungsten)

 - Can we talk by MSN? Use up less paper
 Add me : Famcdgll@yahoo.ca

 I'd say we basically now agree on almost everything.
 We just phrase it differently.

Post Merge: September 11, 2010, 07:04:37 PM

@Aouch
I like your idea about the "zombie" stug 3 , but i don't know if devs have considered to add "recovery vehicle" ability...

- Pz3 50 LONG were sent to be converted to StuG3. ?

He said that all the pIII that you choose to upgrade as AT, would be given the chance to be converted to StugIII.

I think Pz.III shouldn't match later tiers tanks.

 - -- -
 He said it best
 I don't think Pz.3 should match later tiers tanks.
 Got StuG3 for that. And it's historical. Should they
 be able to kill later tier tank? Sure, just not efficiently.
 - I like the zombie stug a lot

[Aouch]

OK, I think both of us are fine now! 

Maybe Ryousan should clear up by himself what he meant. I'm also talking about Pz3 as MTB and Stug3 as tankdestroyer/assault-gun. Of course with MTB I mean "midgame-multiporpusetank-with-some-risks-when-sended-against-T-34-spam"  () and with tankdestroyer/assault-gun I mean "mid-lategame-great-to-deal-with-enemy-armour-tank"

Stuart - Sherman75 - Sherman 76
 Pz3L42- Pz3L60/L24 - Tungsten or StuG3

Yeah, that's we I meant. However, OH's tanks are better put in between those, I think:
Stuart < Pz3L42 < Sherman75 = Pz3L60 < Sherman76/T34-76 = Pz3L60+Tungsten < T-34/85 < Stug3

Tanks of the Ostheer differs very much from the existing concept which puts every tank more or less a counterpart.   


Sadly I don't have MSN. We can use Forum-PN, which is of course a bit uncomfortably, but since it seems that we live in different time-zones it's probably easier.